What is the license of generated files?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
15 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

What is the license of generated files?

Jeff Johnston
I wish to use gtk-doc to create a test case for the Eclipse devhelp
plug-in.  I have a simple C test with one function which I generate
devhelp for.  The generation results in a set of files: a css file, the
devhelp file, some .png files (home.png, left.png, right.png), etc...
None have any license information.

Where can I find information regarding the license or lack of license of
the various generated files?  I was unable to find anything in the
gtk-doc manual.  I would prefer they would be unlicensed or under my
control as there are restrictions on what can be stored in the
Eclipse.org repository (e.g. GPL is not allowed).

-- Jeff J.
_______________________________________________
gtk-doc-list mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-doc-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: What is the license of generated files?

Stefan Sauer-4
On 12/10/2012 05:41 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
I wish to use gtk-doc to create a test case for the Eclipse devhelp plug-in.  I have a simple C test with one function which I generate devhelp for.  The generation results in a set of files: a css file, the devhelp file, some .png files (home.png, left.png, right.png), etc... None have any license information.

Where can I find information regarding the license or lack of license of the various generated files?  I was unable to find anything in the gtk-doc manual.  I would prefer they would be unlicensed or under my control as there are restrictions on what can be stored in the Eclipse.org repository (e.g. GPL is not allowed).
A good question. While I have been modifying the css file during the years of my maintainership, I have not touched the png images. Historically projects have often been shipping the generated files with tarballs.

This commit added the png files (in 2002):
http://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk-doc/commit/?id=693e30961614e4a05f8d2694c4ad32b0306c650c

I am confident that we can license the css to whatever we want. In this commit
http://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk-doc/commit/?id=07971801371971f69b03c190d91aab4e5177e5c5
it was extracted from the xsl file.

What license would work well? Creative Commons? We can probably do something like autotools:
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=autoconf.git;a=blob;f=COPYING.EXCEPTION
but I am not up to the task to formulate such an exception.

Stefan

_______________________________________________
gtk-doc-list mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-doc-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: What is the license of generated files?

Jeff Johnston
On 12/14/2012 11:19 AM, Stefan Sauer wrote:

> On 12/10/2012 05:41 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
>> I wish to use gtk-doc to create a test case for the Eclipse devhelp
>> plug-in.  I have a simple C test with one function which I generate
>> devhelp for.  The generation results in a set of files: a css file,
>> the devhelp file, some .png files (home.png, left.png, right.png),
>> etc... None have any license information.
>>
>> Where can I find information regarding the license or lack of license
>> of the various generated files?  I was unable to find anything in the
>> gtk-doc manual.  I would prefer they would be unlicensed or under my
>> control as there are restrictions on what can be stored in the
>> Eclipse.org repository (e.g. GPL is not allowed).
> A good question. While I have been modifying the css file during the
> years of my maintainership, I have not touched the png images.
> Historically projects have often been shipping the generated files with
> tarballs.
>
> This commit added the png files (in 2002):
> http://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk-doc/commit/?id=693e30961614e4a05f8d2694c4ad32b0306c650c
>
> I am confident that we can license the css to whatever we want. In this
> commit
> http://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk-doc/commit/?id=07971801371971f69b03c190d91aab4e5177e5c5
> it was extracted from the xsl file.
>
> What license would work well? Creative Commons? We can probably do
> something like autotools:
> http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=autoconf.git;a=blob;f=COPYING.EXCEPTION
> <http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=autoconf.git;a=blob;f=COPYING.EXCEPTION;>
> but I am not up to the task to formulate such an exception.
>

I personally like the exception method ala Autotools but would be fine
with the GFDL 1.3 license which has already been cleared with Eclipse.org.

Is there any way of contacting the original contributor of the .png
files to have them licensed?  If not, I would suggest replacing them.
It should be simple to find such icons with an appropriate license.

-- Jeff J.

> Stefan
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gtk-doc-list mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-doc-list
>

_______________________________________________
gtk-doc-list mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-doc-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: What is the license of generated files?

David Nečas (Yeti)-2
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 12:54:13PM -0500, Jeff Johnston wrote:
> I personally like the exception method ala Autotools but would be
> fine with the GFDL 1.3 license which has already been cleared with
> Eclipse.org.

I hope that whatever license is chosen it is meant to be be dual with
GNU GPL under which they are implicitly licensed now.  GNU FDL is a
peculiar license, incompatible with GNU GPL(!) and in some variants
verging on non-free, whether cleared by eclipse.org or not.  If the
files were GNU FDL license I am afraid many would nave to look for
replacements under a different license.

> Is there any way of contacting the original contributor of the .png
> files to have them licensed?  If not, I would suggest replacing
> them. It should be simple to find such icons with an appropriate
> license.

As someone who likes the current images and their current license I
wonder what is the best way to keep them used when the documentation of
my projects is compiled.

Yeti

_______________________________________________
gtk-doc-list mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-doc-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: What is the license of generated files?

Jeff Johnston
On 12/14/2012 01:11 PM, David Nečas wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 12:54:13PM -0500, Jeff Johnston wrote:
>> I personally like the exception method ala Autotools but would be
>> fine with the GFDL 1.3 license which has already been cleared with
>> Eclipse.org.
>
> I hope that whatever license is chosen it is meant to be be dual with
> GNU GPL under which they are implicitly licensed now.  GNU FDL is a
> peculiar license, incompatible with GNU GPL(!) and in some variants
> verging on non-free, whether cleared by eclipse.org or not.  If the
> files were GNU FDL license I am afraid many would nave to look for
> replacements under a different license.
>
>> Is there any way of contacting the original contributor of the .png
>> files to have them licensed?  If not, I would suggest replacing
>> them. It should be simple to find such icons with an appropriate
>> license.
>
> As someone who likes the current images and their current license I
> wonder what is the best way to keep them used when the documentation of
> my projects is compiled.
>
> Yeti
>

Any progress on this?  This is potentially a serious issue.  Should I
open a bug against gtk docs?

GPL would be unacceptable from our stand-point for documentation.  I
think the best solution would be that the owner of the documentation
gets to decide how to license the generated files (i.e. they purposely
have no license information).

The icons still need to be dealt with.

-- Jeff

_______________________________________________
gtk-doc-list mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-doc-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: What is the license of generated files?

Stefan Sauer-4
+legal-list, any suggestions?

Stefan

On 02/04/2013 11:03 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:

> On 12/14/2012 01:11 PM, David Nečas wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 12:54:13PM -0500, Jeff Johnston wrote:
>>> I personally like the exception method ala Autotools but would be
>>> fine with the GFDL 1.3 license which has already been cleared with
>>> Eclipse.org.
>>
>> I hope that whatever license is chosen it is meant to be be dual with
>> GNU GPL under which they are implicitly licensed now.  GNU FDL is a
>> peculiar license, incompatible with GNU GPL(!) and in some variants
>> verging on non-free, whether cleared by eclipse.org or not.  If the
>> files were GNU FDL license I am afraid many would nave to look for
>> replacements under a different license.
>>
>>> Is there any way of contacting the original contributor of the .png
>>> files to have them licensed?  If not, I would suggest replacing
>>> them. It should be simple to find such icons with an appropriate
>>> license.
>>
>> As someone who likes the current images and their current license I
>> wonder what is the best way to keep them used when the documentation of
>> my projects is compiled.
>>
>> Yeti
>>
>
> Any progress on this?  This is potentially a serious issue.  Should I
> open a bug against gtk docs?
>
> GPL would be unacceptable from our stand-point for documentation.  I
> think the best solution would be that the owner of the documentation
> gets to decide how to license the generated files (i.e. they purposely
> have no license information).
>
> The icons still need to be dealt with.
>
> -- Jeff
>
> _______________________________________________
> gtk-doc-list mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-doc-list

_______________________________________________
gtk-doc-list mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-doc-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: What is the license of generated files?

Tobias Mueller
Hi Stefan,

On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 02:25:06PM +0200, Stefan Sauer wrote:
> +legal-list, any suggestions?
>
To clear up the situation: What PNG file is this about?

Cheers,
  Tobi
_______________________________________________
gtk-doc-list mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-doc-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: What is the license of generated files?

Shaun McCance-2
In reply to this post by Stefan Sauer-4
I realize gtk-doc doesn't use yelp's tool chain, but just as a point of
comparison, yelp-xsl's COPYING file goes to some trouble to clarify this
kind of situation and give broad permissions on generated files:

https://git.gnome.org/browse/yelp-xsl/tree/COPYING

Stefan, I don't know how much control you have over the copyrights of
these files, but I'd suggest doing something similar if possible.

--
Shaun

On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 14:25 +0200, Stefan Sauer wrote:

> +legal-list, any suggestions?
>
> Stefan
>
> On 02/04/2013 11:03 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
> > On 12/14/2012 01:11 PM, David Nečas wrote:
> >> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 12:54:13PM -0500, Jeff Johnston wrote:
> >>> I personally like the exception method ala Autotools but would be
> >>> fine with the GFDL 1.3 license which has already been cleared with
> >>> Eclipse.org.
> >>
> >> I hope that whatever license is chosen it is meant to be be dual with
> >> GNU GPL under which they are implicitly licensed now.  GNU FDL is a
> >> peculiar license, incompatible with GNU GPL(!) and in some variants
> >> verging on non-free, whether cleared by eclipse.org or not.  If the
> >> files were GNU FDL license I am afraid many would nave to look for
> >> replacements under a different license.
> >>
> >>> Is there any way of contacting the original contributor of the .png
> >>> files to have them licensed?  If not, I would suggest replacing
> >>> them. It should be simple to find such icons with an appropriate
> >>> license.
> >>
> >> As someone who likes the current images and their current license I
> >> wonder what is the best way to keep them used when the documentation of
> >> my projects is compiled.
> >>
> >> Yeti
> >>
> >
> > Any progress on this?  This is potentially a serious issue.  Should I
> > open a bug against gtk docs?
> >
> > GPL would be unacceptable from our stand-point for documentation.  I
> > think the best solution would be that the owner of the documentation
> > gets to decide how to license the generated files (i.e. they purposely
> > have no license information).
> >
> > The icons still need to be dealt with.
> >
> > -- Jeff
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > gtk-doc-list mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-doc-list
>
> _______________________________________________
> legal-list mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/legal-list
> --
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/board-list
>
> From time to time confidential and sensitive information will be discussed
> on this mailing list. Please take care to mark confidential information as
> confidential, and do not redistribute this information without permission.


_______________________________________________
gtk-doc-list mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-doc-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: What is the license of generated files?

Stefan Sauer-4
In reply to this post by Tobias Mueller
On 07/01/2013 01:41 PM, Tobias Mueller wrote:
Hi Stefan,

On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 02:25:06PM +0200, Stefan Sauer wrote:
+legal-list, any suggestions?

To clear up the situation: What PNG file is this about?

Cheers,
  Tobi
https://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk-doc/tree/

https://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk-doc/tree/home.png
https://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk-doc/tree/left.png
...

Stefan

_______________________________________________
gtk-doc-list mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-doc-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: What is the license of generated files?

Tobias Mueller
Hi everyone.

I am not very knowledgable in field so I may be completely wrong.

On Fri, Jul 05, 2013 at 09:52:00PM +0200, Stefan Sauer wrote:
> https://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk-doc/tree/home.png
> https://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk-doc/tree/left.png
>
These files appear to be licensed under the terms of the GPL.
If you want to redistribute them, I guess you need to comply with the license.

The problem at hand seems to be whether something gtk-doc creates is also GPLed.
Generally, the GPL does not seem to expand on the output a GPLed program <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLOutput>

But it seems as if gtk-doc would merely copy a GPL licensed file as
opposed to generate it, so my guess is that the GPL expands to the copy.

If you generated the file (i.e. using an image library), it could
probably be considered output which is not covered by the GPL.

Again, IANAL. Far from it. If anybody has another intepretation of the
case or if I missed anything, I'd be delighted to be told.

Cheers,
  Tobi
_______________________________________________
gtk-doc-list mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-doc-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: What is the license of generated files?

Luc Pionchon-2
On 19 July 2013 12:10, Tobias Mueller <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi everyone.
>
> I am not very knowledgable in field so I may be completely wrong.
>
> On Fri, Jul 05, 2013 at 09:52:00PM +0200, Stefan Sauer wrote:
>> https://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk-doc/tree/home.png
>> https://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk-doc/tree/left.png
>>
> These files appear to be licensed under the terms of the GPL.
> If you want to redistribute them, I guess you need to comply with the license.
>
> The problem at hand seems to be whether something gtk-doc creates is also GPLed.
> Generally, the GPL does not seem to expand on the output a GPLed program <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLOutput>
>
> But it seems as if gtk-doc would merely copy a GPL licensed file as
> opposed to generate it, so my guess is that the GPL expands to the copy.
>
> If you generated the file (i.e. using an image library), it could
> probably be considered output which is not covered by the GPL.
>
> Again, IANAL. Far from it. If anybody has another intepretation of the
> case or if I missed anything, I'd be delighted to be told.


I think we need to consider the intention, and eventually correct the
license bits.

Especially here we are talking about three very basic icons
(navigation icons). It is trivial to do new ones if (re)licensing is a
problem.

So, isn't the intention: "the generated (*) documentation is yours,
use/license as you wish" ?

(*) including the copied files.


If "license as you wish" would be a problem, maybe a simple Creative
Commons Attribution would make everybody happy.
http://creativecommons.org/choose/
_______________________________________________
gtk-doc-list mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-doc-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: What is the license of generated files?

Tobias Mueller
Aloha :)

On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 01:00:24PM +0300, Luc Pionchon wrote:
> Especially here we are talking about three very basic icons
> (navigation icons). It is trivial to do new ones if (re)licensing is a
> problem.
>
cool. That's probably the easiest thing to do.

Cheers,
  Tobi
_______________________________________________
gtk-doc-list mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-doc-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: What is the license of generated files?

Stefan Sauer-4
On 07/19/2013 01:20 PM, Tobias Mueller wrote:

> Aloha :)
>
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 01:00:24PM +0300, Luc Pionchon wrote:
>> Especially here we are talking about three very basic icons
>> (navigation icons). It is trivial to do new ones if (re)licensing is a
>> problem.
>>
> cool. That's probably the easiest thing to do.
>
> Cheers,
>   Tobi
So, ho do we do this practically? we could replace the original files
with new files, put them into a subdir and add a COPYING note there that
declares them as public domain?

Stefan
_______________________________________________
gtk-doc-list mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-doc-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: What is the license of generated files?

Tobias Mueller
On Sat, Feb 01, 2014 at 12:04:09PM +0100, Stefan Sauer wrote:
> So, ho do we do this practically? we could replace the original files
> with new files, put them into a subdir and add a COPYING note there that
> declares them as public domain?
>
That should do the trick. You could probably edit COPYING directly, but it'd be
a bit messy as it might confuse some automatic license scanners.

Cheers,
  Tobi
_______________________________________________
gtk-doc-list mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-doc-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: What is the license of generated files?

Stefan Sauer-4
On 02/03/2014 08:18 PM, Tobias Mueller wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 01, 2014 at 12:04:09PM +0100, Stefan Sauer wrote:
>> So, ho do we do this practically? we could replace the original files
>> with new files, put them into a subdir and add a COPYING note there that
>> declares them as public domain?
>>
> That should do the trick. You could probably edit COPYING directly, but it'd be
> a bit messy as it might confuse some automatic license scanners.
>
> Cheers,
>   Tobi
commit d86bb8b7bea058b8e53f6e521839d989f285eaf3
Author: Stefan Sauer <[hidden email]>
Date:   Tue Feb 4 20:20:09 2014 +0100

    style: group files we redistribute with the generated docs
   
    Add a style directory and move the images + the css there. Add a
COPYING file to
    clarify their license.

_______________________________________________
gtk-doc-list mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-doc-list
Loading...